My opinions about Diana were establsished throughout these matters:from Morton's book to her interview to her post-divource behavours and biographies written after her death. These close-up and careful readings about Diana and the royal family makes me really hard to take Diana's side. Diana could be a very sweet person to many people, but I always find hard to forgive her way of damaging the monarchy and using unreasonable revenges. I would say she was too self-pity to look into herself and found her own parts of mistakes in her own unfortuntes until very late stage of her life. Probably what Diana always needed was a man who can help her deal matters in a healthy and balance way and also love her in an unconditional way. Prince Charles is not cetainly that man. Dr. Hahn could be that man, but unforutunately their relationships did not have much chance beacuase of her public status and their cultural difference and Diana's own stubborn even extreme views about certain matters.

Diana was a sad person. I adore Camilla for her always dealing diffliculties in her life in a strong way, but Diana deserved a lot of sympathy depsite my opinions for her will not change much after so many readings.

I loved Diana in the beginning because like everyone else I got caught in the fairytale. And of course, she was charming, warm and had great life and future ahead of her. I’m a strong believer in: you should never wash your dirty laundry in public. With the publication of Andrew Morton’s book, I suspected from all the newspaper stories that Diana was behind it because of all the personal detailed contained in it.

I began to strongly dislike her when suggested in the book that Charles was an unfit father, which I found unforgivable. The way I looked at it was I could not respect a person who did not have the emotional intelligence needed to spare her own children from her mess. From that point on, I became a supporter of the prince simply because of the amount of vanity that the newspapers were selling. Mind you, I would kick my husband to the curb if he ever cheated on me. But, I can imagine that being the heir and dealing with a wife like Diana must have been a nightmare.

I could not believe Diana’s audacity when she questioned Charles fitness to ascend the throne. She let all the press adulation go to her head, and she forgot who made her a princess. Of course Charles was not innocent, but he did not deserve to be denied his birthright, especially since she was not pure herself. When the divorce announcement came, I had hoped that she could finally rebuild her life.

In the end, I saw her as an immature woman who was unable to understand her position. as a result, she unintentionally almost destroyed her son’s future. I felt sorry that she felt unfulfilled during her life. I was really saddened that she died way too young and left behind the only two people that had brought her real joy, her two boys.

__________________The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind. ~ Albert Camus

I voted other because I was 12 when she died. I knew who she was and I always respected her for doing good in the world. Like Beatrix I lost a relative around then so I didn't pay much attention. What I have heard about her is little because I am from American. The Truth pointed out a very true statement that American's have been very loyal and kind to her so it is hard to find bad things unless one is looking. I have avoided the bad because most of the time it is venomous crap people have come up with to sell tabloids. Even though I may not agree with all of her personal choices I still respect the work she did with AIDS and children.

I was young when she died, and about 6 years ago I started to learn more and more about her, and the conclusions I was coming to was she was a very real person who put her own experiences and mistakes out there for others to learn from...but when I came across the phone calls to Oliver Hoare I really thought differently of her. It just showed that she was very obsessive and controlling. It wasn't so bad that i hated her for it, they were traits of hers, so whatever, but I looked at her different after that.

I'm not really sure, TheTruth. It was one of Jo's suggestions. Maybe she can explain.

With "Hewitt" I meant the information that while Diana claimed Charles had had an affair with Camilla and that was the reason for all problems, she herself had had an affair as well. "Hewitt" stands for the hypocrisy of doing yourself what you blame your partner for.

__________________'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.

My opinion hasn't altered over the course of time. I thought her a beautiful woman when alive and I hold that memory still today.

A person of great depth and feeling. Emotionally driven, many times to a certain excess though I saw this as no fault of her own. She could not help feeling the way she did. The mind is such a powerful tool, after all.

Her choices weren't always the best though they were her choices to make.

I always used to like Diana, and as a matter of fact I still do. The part of her that was a caring personality, loving mother, shy and honest person attracted me, and I will always be very fond of that Diana.

But the other Diana, which for me emerged with that Panorama interview, was less then attractive. The interview was simply revolting, I hated how manipulative she with those black eyes, deep voice, careful rehearsals. And I was really enreaged by the suggestions that Charles is not fit to be a King, or that he is not a good father.
Even if he were not the best father in the world (and I beleive he is a great Dad), no mother should have ever said that, least of all in front of millions of people.
Another thing was that 'there were 3 of us in the marriage, so it was a bit crowded'. She obviously didn't count well, not with Hewitt and the other men in her life.

That interview was a directed and very spiteful attack the Royal Family, and on Charles personally. And I don't like spiteful attacks.

__________________Queen Elizabeth: "I cannot lead you into battle, I do not give you laws or administer justice but I can do something else, I can give you my heart and my devotion to these old islands and to all the peoples of our brotherhood of nations." God, Save The Queen!

Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France

Posts: 2,682

Well the Panorama Interview was THE most terrible mistake in her whole life IMO. It was so bad that even when I look at it, I can't help but feel bad for the RF, in particular for Charles. He had already done this mistake of taking an interview and if one day Diana was back against the wall, it could have turned into a great argument by saying : "At least, I didn't talk about my private life in front of millions.". And she ruined this unique chance to defend herself by doing exactly the opposite of what could have saved her in the eyes of many.

That interview wasa directed and very spitful attack the Royal Family, and on Charles personally. And I don't like spitful attacks.

I think you mean spiteful not spitful.

__________________"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."

__________________Queen Elizabeth: "I cannot lead you into battle, I do not give you laws or administer justice but I can do something else, I can give you my heart and my devotion to these old islands and to all the peoples of our brotherhood of nations." God, Save The Queen!

My opinion of Diana didn´t change.
I enjoyed to watch the marriage 1981 on TV and had some tears in my eyes, but very quickly afterwards i removed my rosa-coloured glasses and i saw only a couple that never suited each other.
I never could share the fascination, the admiration and the love so many people feel for Diana till today.
My feelings for her are some pity, ( because i think, when she married Charles, she really believed in her own fairytale, and she never could deal with the reality), some rage ( for instance because of the Panorama interview and of the damage she did on Charles),and some sympathy ( for her as a mother and for her charity work).
I´m interested in Diana as a ´historic person´ but she was never the kind of woman i would like to meet and have tea with ( in opposite of Camilla).

__________________´We will all have to account for our actions to our children and grand-children, and if we don´t get this right, how will they ever forgive us?´Prince Charles in a speech, 6th December 2006

Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France

Posts: 2,682

It seems that according to the comments on the thread, we are many to have different feelings and sometimes paradoxal ones like sympathy and rage, just like you milla Ca. But I love that in a person. Understand me, I wouldn't want that person to be my friend because you never know what his reactions are going to be but I find it fascinating in famous people's personality.

I understand what you're saying except I have the opposite view. To me, she was a wonderful woman with a lot of potential, but she could not overcome the loneliness of her childhood and her disappointment in love. While she had a complex character, I did not find her fascinating at all because she bared her soul for all.

In contrast to Diana, and although a very different circumstance, Jackie Kennedy was a true fascinating personality. She left us to ponder - how could she... why did she... was she strong... was she weak...? - and those questions will never be answered fully. Regardless of what the real truth was, no one can question the dignity she exhibited during that period, which is something we cannot say of Diana.

__________________The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind. ~ Albert Camus

Well, what can I say that hasn't been said? I did get up early when I was 6 years old to watch the "Wedding of the Century" and I was bowled over by it, and then there she was, on every newspaper and magazine I turned to. It was unbelievable and fascinating--
Let's flash forward to the nineties---a time when I was graduating from high school, in college, and graduating from college (first time--I'm going back now for another degree--much harder with a child BTW). I'm now married and I can tell you all that marriage ain't easy, but nothing worth having is easy. My husband and I are polar opposites, but we make it work and we have that settled down, been together, comfortable love that you only have when you truly learn to put each other first.
Charles and Diana did not have that--Charles and Camilla do have that. You could see it on their wedding day. I saw both weddings, and it is my opinion that while the first one was truly a dream wedding filled with carriages and fluff and "Oh my's" it was just a show. Charles and Camilla's wedding was very simple and genuine, and it meant more to me, as an adult who has learned how consuming and frustrating love can be, than the 1981 wedding did. I was only a child then, and I saw it through a child's eyes. I think in some ways that is what happened with Diana--bless her heart. She was so young, she saw the world through rose colored glasses and expected to live a fairytale. When her fairytale ended, she did that horrid book, and then the panamora interview. For me, it was when when she criticized Charles and whether he was fit to be king. It was also those coy looks, batting eyelashes, and sideways glances. It was all so engineered and fake. But, when it was revealed that she had pushed Raine Spencer down the stairs, well, come on--it all changed. "The People's Princess" had a nasty temper and couldnt' control it. I think she could have been amazing, but it never happened. She was spoiled and petulant, and always upstaging Charles because of her need to be better, to be first, etc....
Also, I chose Charles' interview because I thought it was incredibly brave of him to do that interview in the face of everything that was going on, and that was the mark of a future king. She however, wore that "Revenge Dress" in an attempt to futher upstage him.

__________________Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill

Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France

Posts: 2,682

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimene

I understand what you're saying except I have the opposite view. To me, she was a wonderful woman with a lot of potential, but she could not overcome the loneliness of her childhood and her disappointment in love. While she had a complex character, I did not find her fascinating at all because she bared her soul for all.

In contrast to Diana, and although a very different circumstance, Jackie Kennedy was a true fascinating personality. She left us to ponder - how could she... why did she... was she strong... was she weak...? - and those questions will never be answered fully. Regardless of what the real truth was, no one can question the dignity she exhibited during that period, which is something we cannot say of Diana.

True but I wasn't talking of doubts in her personality but more of changes. Frist there was the "Shy Di" then we had the "Di Mania". People were crazy about her and thought they knew her. But her choices showed us how wrong we were and I love the way it turned out. The public was blinded by the "Saint Diana" of the medias and it makes me laugh how she succeded to fool many. Of course I'm not at all talking about the charities she has supported. That came from the heart.

True but I wasn't talking of doubts in her personality but more of changes. Frist there was the "Shy Di" then we had the "Di Mania". People were crazy about her and thought they knew her. But her choices showed us how wrong we were and I love the way it turned out. The public was blinded by the "Saint Diana" of the medias and it makes me laugh how she succeded to fool many. Of course I'm not at all talking about the charities she has supported. That came from the heart.

Understood! On your final point, I like Princess Anne's low-key approach to doing her work much better. But, of course I do not take anything away from Diana's caring nature, which was always in evidence when she met people who were less fortunate than her.

__________________The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind. ~ Albert Camus

Understood! On your final point, I like Princess Anne's low-key approach to doing her work much better. But, of course I do not take away anything from Diana's caring nature, which was always in evidence when she met people who were less fortunate than her.

You have highlighted a significant point. I think it says a lot about her that she didn't seem to have this same caring nature toward people who were her equals or superiors.